Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Saturday, September 17, 2011
LETTER TO REGISTRAR ELDRED FROM BOTH MR. LAW AND MR. CHIN REGARDING THE LISTING OF THEIR RESPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO REMOVE THE ERRORS OF LAW ON THE COURT RECORDS IN CACV 107 OF 2008
NICHOLAS
NI KOK CHIN
387,
Alexander Drive
Phone:
08 92757440 Mobile
Email:
nnchin1@gmail.com
MAURICE
FREDERICK LAW
87,
William Street.
Phone
& Fax: 08 92961555
Email:
moza35@bigpond.com
Monday,
September 19, 2011
The
Court of Appeal Registrar
Atten:
Associate to Registrar Eldred Ms. Maria Santos-Bond
Supreme
Court of WA, Court of Appeal
Phone:
94215335
Fax:
94215471
Ref:
CACV 107 of 2008
Dear
Sirs
CACV 107 OF 2008: Chin v Hall &
Anor; ERRORS OF LAW APPARENT ON COURT REECORDS IN CACV 107 OF 2008 AND CIV1775
of 200.
SAT VR 87 of 2009; VR 158 of 2011:
FALSIFICATIONS OF COURET RECORDS IN CIV 1131 OF 2006 BY DAVID TAYLOR SOLICITOR
Reference
your separate letters dated 15th day of September, 2011 to both of
us, we would like to state that our applications dated 15th day of
July, 2011 respectively do contain the focused issue of the falsifications of
court records in CIV 1131 of 2006 (the issue).
The
issue is neither res judicata nor an abuse of process, on the following
grounds:
a)
The parties who are
directly affected by it are ourselves and we have been denied natural justice
by the trial judge and the appeal judge in the various fora.
b)
There has never
been a statement of reasons that bears directly on the issue.
c)
The issue is
neither frivolous nor vexatious because it is relevant to our claim and and our
rights and it does not contain any falsehoods.
d)
We are not abusing the process of court
because we are NOT seeking to re-litigate the issue nor are we making
collateral attacks on the decisions of the various fora.
e)
The decisions of
the various fora have been manipulated by the fraud of interested parties who
had misled the court to make defective decisions. Fraud must be unraveled.
There
is therefore, a travesty of justice (or the error of law apparent on the court
records in CACV 107 of 2008 and CIV 1775 of 2008 in the judgment of Owen JA) in
terms of the following (the error of law):
1
The decision was
made not in accordance with the law.
2
There are no
manifestations of impartiality of the trial or the appeal judges.
3
There is no
statement of reason that relates to the focused issue of the falsifications of
court records by both David Taylor and Registrar Powell acting in cahoots with
each other (the focused issue).
4
The focused issue
revolves around the impartial findings of the following facts in the various
fora which have never been made by any trial judge or any appeal judge in the
following terms (the facts of the focused issue):
4.1. Invoice
No. 201702 dated 10.2006 contains the words Personal Cheque which is a fiction
or an after thought of David Taylor and Registrar Powell (the false receipt).
4.2. The
false receipt caused the falsification of the court records in CIV 1131 of 2006
on 16.2.2006 by David Taylor (the falsifications of court records).
4.3. The
Personal cheque has never been proven by the party who has obligations under
the law to prove its existence, namely David Taylor or Registrar Powell.
4.4. The
existence of the personal cheque was avoided by Registrar Powell who refused to
provide the bank statement showing that the personal cheque of $654.00 was
indeed paid into the Registry of the Supreme Court on 10.2.2006 (the
avoidance).
4.5. The
avoidance was made by Registrar Powell in his response letter to Mr. Chin dated
4.6.2006.
4.6. Invoice
No. 202483 dated 16.2.2006 is the only invoice that was issued by the Registry
of the Supreme Court on that date and on no other date (the real receipt of the court fees of $654.20).
4.7. The
real receipt of the court
fees was made by David Taylor on 16.2.2006 with a credit card and there is the
missing word Personal cheque on it.
4.8. The learned Registrar Powell’s letter
dated 11.6.2009 is an attempt by him to cover up the facts of the focused issue
by introducing the false notion of the false receipt. This is an abuse of powers of a public
officer in the person of a judicial officer who traded his favours in exchange
for personal gain (the corrupt act of Registrar Powell).
4.9. The
corrupt act of Registrar Powell is backed up by circumstantial evidence of
malicious intent:
4.10. Registrar
Powell made a costs order of $300.00 against Mr. Chin for not being present in
court in CIV 1131 of 2006 knowing that the latter was not the legal
representative of Nancy Hall on the ground of the falsification of the court
records (the $300.00 null costs order).
4.11. David
Taylor instituted the proceedings in the Magistrates Court Midland
4.12. David
Taylor goaded Mr. Law against Mr. Chin in order to stop Mr. Chin from
complaining the falsifications of the court records in CIV 1131 of 2006 on
10.2.2006.
4.13. The
falsifications of the court records in CIV1131 of 2006 caused Mr. Chin to lose
his status as an independent lawyer.
4.14. Mr.
Chin alerted David Taylor that Jenkins J Order dated 20.1.2006 was not complied
with by the latter on the 15.2.2006 and this caused the falsifications of the
court records (the alert).
4.15. Registrar
Powell taxed the null costs orders of Master Sanderson in CIV 1775 of 2008
against both Mr. Chin and Mr. Law and manifested an intention for them to be maliciously
enforced despite his having been warned that he is the judge in his own cause.
4.16. Mr.
Law was invoiced electronically by David Taylor only on 15.2.2006 after the
alert on 15.2.2006 for the payment of court fees of $654.00 only and not
$654.20 cents. Nobody would stop a Writ
for 20 cents unless the bigger amount was not paid at all (the genuine mistake
of paying 20 cents short on 16.2.2006).
4.17. The
genuine mistake of paying 20 cents short on 16.2.2006 was capitalized by
Registrar Powell to make the fake story of the falsifications of court records
by David Taylor as an after-thought, sound true and not far-fetched.
The
LPCC did not make the correct decision affecting the focused issue as a result
of the complaint of Mr. Law. Therefore,
Mr. Law has lodged an application before the State Administrative Tribunal to
litigate the focused issue in VR158 of 2008 since the 13.9.2011. It is therefore best for both of us to await
the decision of the State Administrative Tribunal before we request you to list
this matter for leave before a Judge in Chambers pursuant to Order 67 r.5 of
the Rules of Supreme Court, 1971.
The
court can do no wrong. If there is an
error of law, it must be removed by the court. The inherent jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court of WA must be invoked to remove the error of law. It is the duty of court to point the right
procedure for the removal of the error of law.
No one is above the law. A complaint has been to the Chief Justice to
check on the error of law. The WA Major
Fraud Squad has decided to refer this error of law to the Chief Justice. Only after the Chief Justice has done his
job, can the Major Fraud of WA Police come back to do their tasks to
investigate this matter further.
Ms.
Le Miere for the LPCC has on 13.9.2011 been dealing with Mr. Law in a dishonest
manner before Justice Chaney in VR158 of 2011 by showing that the LPCC is not
independent of David Taylor. She also on
previous occasions before His Honour Judge Sharp had been been unwilling to do
her duties honestly in the name of justice.
The learned Ms. Le Miere has yet to answer the questions which Mr. Chin posed
to her in his letteer dated 8.4.2011. It is in the best interests of justice that
Ms. Le Miere is not involved in this matter in future proceedings in either VR
158 of 2011 or VR 87 of 2009. If she is
there, we anticipate mischief.
Yours
faithfully
NICHOLAS
N CHIN ………………………………………………………………
MAURICE
FREDERICK LAW …………………………………………………..
Copy
to:
1) The
Legal Profession Complaints Committee
2nd Floor Colonial
Building , 55 St
George's Terrace
PERTH
Phone: (08) 9461 2299
Fax: 08 9461 2265
Email: lpcc@lpbwa.com
2) The
Chief Executive Officer
State
Administrative Tribunal
12 St. George’s
Fax:
93255099
Atten:
Mr. Allen & Associate to Deputy President Judge Sharp
Ref:
VR158 of 2011 and VR 87 of 2011
3) The
Chief Justice of WA Wayne Martin
Chief
Justice Chambers
Supreme
Court of WA
Phone:
08 94215337
Fax:
08 9221 3833
4) Sergeant
Kearns Gangin
Major
Fraud Squad of WA Police
Level
7, East Point Plaza
233
Adelaide
Phone:
08-9220700
Fax:
08 9225 4489
5) The Hon. Justice Michael John Murray
Associate - tel (08) 9421 5400
E-mail - Associate.Justice.Murray@justice.wa.gov.au
Associate - tel (08) 9421 5400
E-mail - Associate.Justice.Murray@justice.wa.gov.au
Ref: CIV 1689 of 2011
6) The Hon. Justice Ralph Lloyd Simmonds
Associate - tel (08) 9421 5349
E-mail - Associate.Justice.Simmonds@justice.wa.gov.au
Associate - tel (08) 9421 5349
E-mail - Associate.Justice.Simmonds@justice.wa.gov.au
Ref:
CIV 2157 of 2011
7) Messrs.
Chris Stokes & Associates
Solicitors
for Plaintiff in CIV 2157 of 2011
Level 1, 459 Hay
St , PERTH , WA
Phone: (08) 9421 1300
Email:
cstokes@stokesandassociates.com.au,
Ref:
CIV 2157 of 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)